How Ultra s Customer Database Meets The Not Generally...

II. Not Generally Known or Readily Ascertainable C A court is likely to find that Ultra’s customer database meets the not generally known or readily ascertainable element. R In determining whether information is not generally known or readily ascertainable, courts consider the following two Restatement factors: â€Å"the extent to which the information is known outside of the business† and â€Å"the ease or difficulty with which the information could be properly acquired or duplicated by others.† Al Minor, 117 Ohio St. 3d at 61 (citing Plain Dealer, 80 Ohio St. 3d at 524-25). †¢ To determine whether the information is not generally known or readily ascertainable is if a trade secret owner â€Å"collected and/or compiled the information from a variety of sources, thus this may support a finding that the information is not generally known or readily ascertainable.† Salemi, 145 Ohio St. 3d at  ¶29. †¢ To determine whether a customer list is not generally known, it â€Å"ordinarily includes not only the name of a business or person but also information that is not generally available to the public, such as the name of a contact person, a non-public telephone or cell phone number, an email address, and other data known only because of the relationship with the client.† Salemi, 2014-Ohio-3914 at  ¶18 (citing Columbus Bookkeeping, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 5655). †¢ While the mere fact that each of the clients at issue are listed in a telephone directory, or can be entered by name in a database,